http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateMagic/spellcastingClassOptions.h tml
Last paragraph of Alternate Class Features:
"If an archetype replaces a class ability that is part of a series of improvements or additions to a base ability (such as a fighter's weapon training or a ranger's favored enemy), the next time the character would gain that ability, it counts as the lower-level ability that was replaced by the archetype. In effect, all abilities in that series are delayed until the next time the class improves that ability. For example, if an archetype replaces a rogue's +2d6 sneak attack bonus at 3rd level, when she reaches 5th level and gains a sneak attack bonus, her sneak attack doesn't jump from +1d6 to +3d6—it improves to +2d6, just as if she had finally gained the increase at 3rd level. This adjustment continues for every level at which her sneak attack would improve, until at 19th level she has +9d6 instead of the +10d6 of a standard rogue."
So, by that, Hexcrafter gets regular Spell Recall at 11th level.
That argument wouldn't be a strong one - improved spell recall is an addition to the base ability of spell recall. Hexcrafters get spell recall at lv 11.
Hmm I can see how to arrive at that conclusion. But I can also see an argument that Spell recall and improved spell recall and very different from the sneak attack or weapon training examples which are class abilities that go up numerically at a set interval while improved spell recall adds entirely new abilities.
Then you can see an arguement that would be entirely wrong and would
A) Fly in the face of RAW (the wording in UM clearly is inclusive to all tiered abilities, which imp spell recall is, as its a blatantly obvious upgrade/improvement in rules function and even in name to a previous abiliy)B) Fly in the face of obvious RAI (are you truly suggesting to us that the hexcrafter at level 11 no longer pays any price for what it gains, unlike every other paizo archtype ever)
C) Be the sort of illogical power gaming 'arguement' that if someone ever tried with me I'd ask them how is the weather in munchkin land.
Hexcrafters get Spell Recall at 11.
They NEVER get Improved Spell Recall.
They get... wait for it... wait for it... Hexes (and then some).
Question 100% answered.
Hmm I can see how to arrive at that conclusion. But I can also see an argument that Spell recall and improved spell recall and very different from the sneak attack or weapon training examples which are class abilities that go up numerically at a set interval while improved spell recall adds entirely new abilities.Then you can see an arguement that would be entirely wrong and would
A) Fly in the face of RAW (the wording in UM clearly is inclusive to all tiered abilities, which imp spell recall is, as its a blatantly obvious upgrade/improvement in rules function and even in name to a previous abiliy)
B) Fly in the face of obvious RAI (are you truly suggesting to us that the hexcrafter at level 11 no longer pays any price for what it gains, unlike every other paizo archtype ever)
C) Be the sort of illogical power gaming 'arguement' that if someone ever tried with me I'd ask them how is the weather in munchkin land.Hexcrafters get Spell Recall at 11.
They NEVER get Improved Spell Recall.
They get... wait for it... wait for it... Hexes (and then some).
Question 100% answered.
Err… coming on a little strong, no? To me it looked like he was suggesting that they don't get anything at 11th level, which is another potentially legit way of looking at it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
THEY GET SPELL RECALL AT LEVEL 11
THEY DONT GET IMPROVED SPELL RECALL. EVAH!
IM TELLING YOUR MOM YOU ARE A NAUGHTY BOY, AND THEN YOUR GM SO HE CAN HOUSE RULE NO MAGI FOR YOU!
This is not 4chan, the all caps crap is not funny.
I thought it was pretty funny…
Back on topic: Am I the only one who reads it as hexcrafters simply lose spell recall period? As in, they get nothing at level 11. It seems clear that the rule about incremental improvements to a class feature being delayed by one step when an archetype replaces one increment of that class feature applies to things like bravery, trap sense, weapon spec, channeling etc. where there are multiple steps in the progression and each step is clearly labeled as being part the same class feature. Whether it applies to things like evasion vs improved evasion, or spell recall vs improved spell recall is less clear however.
For instance, look at the specific language with regards to evasion being replaced on the weapon adept:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/archetypes/paizo---monk-a rchetypes/weapon-adept
There is no clear RAW way to read the hexcrafter spell recall thing, so it really boils down to a common sense interpretation of RAI. For me, I feel that hexcrafters were meant to lose spell recall in its entirety. I can see both sides of the argument though. Has this been FAQed before?
My take on RAW is this: they get Improved Spell Recall, but it does nothing. Improved Spell Recall can't be used w/out already having Spell Recall.
Yes, it's a ridiculous interpretation, but RAW frequently leads to ridiculous results. Often the rules are very poorly drafted.
To me, the rule that has been cited about class features with incremental improvements being delayed by one step when one of those increments is replaced doesn't apply here. That rule applies to features with a very clear schedule of numerical improvements. Where a feature has an "improved" version whose effects differ in some material way, the rule does not apply.
To me that is very clearly the intent behind the rule, and a legitimate interpretation of RAW as well. Here's the a link to the rule for reference's sake:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/class-archetypes
"If an archetype replaces a class feature that is part of a series of improvements or additions to a base ability (such as a fighter's weapon training or a ranger's favored enemy), the next time the character would gain that ability, it counts as the lower-level ability that was replaced by the archetype. In effect, all abilities in that series are delayed until the next time the class improves that ability. For example, if an archetype replaces a rogue's +2d6 sneak attack bonus at 3rd level, when she reaches 5th level and gains a sneak attack bonus, her sneak attack doesn't jump from +1d6 to +3d6—it improves to +2d6, just as if she had finally gained the increase at 3rd level. This adjustment continues for every level at which her sneak attack would improve, until at 19th level she has +9d6 instead of the +10d6 of a standard rogue."
Although, obviously it's not black and white. Interpretations may differ. At the end of the day, whatever works at a given table is the best way to go.
Improved Spell Recall is never replaced, so per what I quoted, you would gain it at 11th level and it would backslide to regular Spell Recall.
And technically by RAW a Hexcrafter will never actually see a Grand Hex. He gets the option to select them at 20th, but there is no arcana or general feat gained at that level to actually take it with. I would houserule they get it as an additional 20th level class feature, cause hey...it's 20th level, who cares?
"At 20th level, a hexcrafter can select a hex, major hex, or grand hex in place of a magus arcana."
Nope. Witches get it at 18. RAW, you'd need to import epic rules from 3E in order to ever get a grand hex.
So just because the one example they use isn't one that replaces the first iteration of a class feature, such occurances don't follow those rules?
If a ranger archetype replaced the first favored enemy selection but said nothing fo the ones at levels, 5, 10, 15, and 20... you would deny the ranger ALL of his favored enemy selections?
You're reaching pretty far there. Must have the lunge feat.
So just because the one example htey use isn't one that replaces the first iteration of a class feature, such occurances don't follow those rules?
If a ranger archetype replaced the first favored enemy selection but said nothing fo the ones at levels, 5, 10, 15, and 20... you would deny the ranger ALL of his favored enemy selections?
You're reaching pretty far there. Must have the lunge feat.
Depends how it's worded. If it said "This ability replaces the ranger's favoured enemy class feature" then yes, that's EXACTLY how I would interpret it.
If it said "This ability replaces the rangers favoured enemy at level 1" then things would obviously be different.
So the fact that Kensai and Soul Forger archetypes specifically replace spell recall and improved spell recall, but Hexcrafter, Myrmidarch, and Skirnir only list losing spell recall makes no difference, they all lose both class features anyway? Even though the latter 3 just say "spell recall" and not "the spell recall class feature," to use your wording for the ranger example?
Also notable, originally the Mobile Fighter archetype only replaced weapon training 1 for the leaping attack ability (which gives identical bonuses, but to any weapon but requires moving 5 ft first). So, by RAW you would still get later weapon training upgrades on top of that. Paizo errata'd Mobile Fighter to replace all weapon training class features. If the rules worked as Bardic Dave claims, this would not have been necessary. At most, a clarification statement that "losing weapon training at 5th level means losing the base ability which means no later weapon trainings" might have been issued.
Yeah, if Hexcrafter were not meant to get Spell Recall at 11th level, the Hex Magus feature would end with the sentence: This feature replaces Spell Recall and Improved Spell Recall.
As it only mentions one of them, that is the one that it replaces. You'll notice that fighter archetypes always specifically replace every step in their series with an individual ability. And since i lack the level of lateral thinking to see Improved Spell Recall as anything but 'part of a series of improvements or additions to a base ability', then the only way i can possibly rule it is that they get Spell recall as soon as they would normally have gained Improved Spell Recall.
Sorry, but I am honestly having trouble seeing how you can get to another conclusion.
Well, of course you can find examples to prove just about any point amongst the various archetypes. As I pointed out earlier, the weapon adept loses evasion at level 2 and then specifically replaces improved evasion with regular evasion at level 8 (or is it 9?). Go check it out. The fact that that was deemed to be necessary supports my view of things.
Really, the problem is that different archetypes are written by different authors. Some probably see the rule the way you do, some see it the way I do. There's no definitive RAW on this point. To me, the confusion over the Mobile Fighter is proof of this. Some author thought that simply replacing weapon training 1 would be sufficient to knock out the whole tree. That was his/her intent in writing the class that way, but it was not sufficiently clear to players. This created disagreement that required an errata.
So my hunch is that the intent was for the hexcrafter to lose the whole ability. I've attempted to outline an approach to the rules to explain why the author might have chosen to write it the way he/she did.
Why do I think that was the intent? Gaining Hexes is sufficiently powerful to warrant this, and there is no clear text (as there is in the weapon adept) to show that it was intended that they get spell recall at 11.
Clearly, you disagree as to the RAI. That's fine. Whatever works at your table. But there's no clear RAW here. Not when different authors of different archetypes so plainly have completely divergent approaches to the rules.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/barbarian/archetypes/paizo---b arbarian-archetypes/elemental-kin
Another question: Does the Elemental Kin get Trap Sense at 6th and every 3 levels thereafter? Your reading would seem to suggest that it does, but it seems pretty plain to me that it's not supposed to. In what material way is spell recall different?
I guess it boils down to how you define the term "spell recall" as it's employed in the hex crafter archetype. Does it refer to an entire class of ability, as the term "trap sense" seems to in the elemental kin, or does it refer to a single iteration of a series of improvements to an ability (as you're claiming it does)?
Sidenote: the reason I think that abilities with "improved" versions don't qualify as being part of a series of improvements (plural), is that they lack several of the features of most of the classic "series" abilities, like weapon training and sneak attack:
1. There are only 2 steps in the series, not many. Hence, there is only one improvement; there is no "series of improvements"
2. The improvement is qualitative, and not purely quantitative (e.g. Sneak attack +2d6 --> Sneak attack +3d6)
3. The text for the base ability and the improved version are listed under separate headings.
I realize that position is somewhat debatable and it's not exactly a great set of facts to hang a RAW ruling on. Still, it's an easy interpretation to make, and I'm sure I'm not alone it making it. My hunch is that at least some of the authors of the various archetypes see things the way I do. Furthermore, I'm willing to bet that the author of the Kensai is not the same person who wrote the Hexcrafter.
Really, Paizo should hire a lawyer with experience drafting legislation to review all their archetypes for consistency of language before publication. I think that ship has long sailed though…
Hexcrafter Magi get Spell Recall at 11
They never get Improved Spell Recall
That IS covered in the current wording of UM, as is
Now the current -examples given- may not include every example possible, but common sense, that doesn't mean they exclude things that the +definition itself+ clearly includes. Examples of a rule aren't themselves the rule doing the defining.
Say I tell you the rule is "If you were getting 2 fruits and instead replace 1 with a vege, you now get just the 1st fruit." To illustrate it I use apples as examples to show you what I mean. That doesn't mean it doesn't also apply to oranges. The apples were just examples. Wording of the rule > Example given.
PFS is, AFAIK, in line w/ all the above as well
So yes, this would be a good FAQ addition, if only to clarify the examples for the few people needing extra clarity (after all, that's what examples are supposed to do), but no, no matter how much you dislike what I said, you're not going to get an answer different from the above which fits the rules as written
Hexcrafters get Spell Recall at 11, they never get Improved Spell Recall, that's already the RAW from UM, and the RAI as the majority of people see it (and Paizo hasn't felt the need to correct).
I just went and looked at every single class and archetype (on D20pfsrd) and there are only FOUR cases similar to the Hexcrafter and three of those are other magus archetypes.
The Hexcrafter, Skirnir and Spire Defended all do not get Spell Recall but have no specific details about how Improved Spell Recall works (or doesn't) for them. (Skirnir appears to be an error on the D20pfsrd site as the table shows it as replacing improved spell recall - but the text doesn't support that).
The Master Summoner archetype of the summoner replaces Shield Ally but appears to get Greater Shield Ally. However it is worth noting that Greater Shield Ally is not dependent on Shield Ally so were I the DM I'd rule that they get the greater shield ally ability since it is a self contained ability (and actually how it stacks or doesn't stack with Shield Ally is a seperate question for FAQs)
But every single other archetype of every single class that has an ability like Spell Recall/Improved Spell Recall has specific details about how that archetype deals with each class ability.
Every single one.
I think it is clear that some errata or at least an FAQ for the Magus archetypes is needed (and likely also for the Master Summoner and more broadly the Shield Ally/greater shield ally abilities)
UM was not Paizos strongest job in editing (RPG books on 'magic' always seem to end up that way, regardless of the company), and it's badly in need of a good FAQ/errata.
Hexcrafter Magi get Spell Recall at 11
They never get Improved Spell Recall
That IS covered in the current wording of UM, as isNow the current -examples given- may not include every example possible, but common sense, that doesn't mean they exclude things that the +definition itself+ clearly includes. Examples of a rule aren't themselves the rule doing the defining.
Say I tell you the rule is "If you were getting 2 fruits and instead replace 1 with a vege, you now get just the 1st fruit." To illustrate it I use apples as examples to show you what I mean. That doesn't mean it doesn't also apply to oranges. The apples were just examples. Wording of the rule > Example given.PFS is, AFAIK, in line w/ all the above as well
So yes, this would be a good FAQ addition, if only to clarify the examples for the few people needing extra clarity (after all, that's what examples are supposed to do), but no, no matter how much you dislike what I said, you're not going to get an answer different from the above which fits the rules as written
Hexcrafters get Spell Recall at 11, they never get Improved Spell Recall, that's already the RAW from UM, and the RAI as the majority of people see it (and Paizo hasn't felt the need to correct).
By RAW, a single improvement (singular) to an ability does not qualify as "a series of improvements (plural) or additions". Maybe that's the RAI. Maybe it's not. I tend to think it's not.
Additionally, the way that certain rogue and barbarian archetypes replace trap sense tends to imply that if you replace the base ability, you don't get subsequent improvements. See the Elemental Kin for an example.
SKR tangentially on this topic here. Not on spell recall itself, but on Instant Alchemy.
By the way, an entire argument shouldn't be based around whether a word is pluralized or not.
Freelancers are too lazy for that to be a valid argument.